Jeremy Peters, the New York Times' designated critic of Republican presidential hopefuls, played the money card on Monday's front page, over a headline that reached back to the 2012 campaign: "G.O.P. Hopefuls Now Try to Woo the 47 Percent." In Peters' previous front-page stories on the GOP field, he has variously accused them of being ignorantly anti-science (in a misleading report on the vaccination controversy) and anti-immigrant.

The apparent political neophytes at the New York Times are constantly appalled to discover that non-supportive things are often said about prominent Democrats during Republican gatherings. Patrick Healy and Jonathan Martin in New Hampshire, "At Republican Gathering, All Talk Is of Clinton (None of It Is Good)". The Times performed a little pushback on Hillary's behalf, warning that delivering anti-Clinton "red meat" to supportive audiences might make candidates seem "minor league."

New York Times veteran foreign reporter John Burns has retired after 40 years with the paper, closing a career of covering hotspots like Afghanistan, China, and Iraq, where Saddam Hussein threatened his life for his brave reporting from Baghdad for the Times and CBS News. A friend gave him the title to this essay of recollections of some of the worst places on Earth: "It's not how far you’ve traveled, it’s what you’ve brought back." What Burns brought back "was an abiding revulsion for ideology, in all its guises," from the Communist dictatorships of China, North Korea, and the Soviet Union, a revulsion some of his fellow reporters have never learned.

Obama adviser Brian Deese was the subject of a fulsome New York Times profile by biased environmental reporter Coral Davenport and biased political profile writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, who teamed up for "On Climate For Obama, Point Man Learns Fast," pitting lovable wonk Deese against the "anger" of Big Coal. And Deese is far from the first Obama staffer to get such favorable treatment.

New York Times reporter Jonathan Mahler covered the damning indictment of Rolling Stone magazine's story of a gang rape at the University of Virginia, but skipped his own paper's disgraceful coverage of a previous campus rape hoax -- involving the Duke lacrosse team in 2006.

If it's Thursday, it must be...yet another front-page New York Times story on the issue that is going to tear the Republican Party apart and doom prospects in 2016 (the actual issue changes every week, of course).

On cue with the ginned-up controversy over Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, came reporter Jennifer Steinhauer's story, under a liberally stacked deck of headlines: "Rights Measures Expose Divisions In G.O.P.'s Ranks – Debate Enters '16 Race – Laws Seen as Targeting Gays, and Posing a Peril to Business."

Reporter Julie Hirschfeld Davis penned a hypocritical tribute to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts in Tuesday's New York Times: "Praising a Senate Mentor, and the Example He Set."

Davis was marking President Obama' speech in Boston at the opening of the Edward M. Kennedy Institute, previously hailed in theTimes. Not even one "liberal" label managed to squeak in to Davis's tribute to (yawn) "the lion of the Senate," nor did a word of the dark side of the Kennedy mystique, like Chappaquiddick. The most glaring omission of all from the Times' encomiums: Sen. Kennedy's vicious attacks on Reagan's Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork.

Adam Davidson of National Public Radio lumped people who oppose illegal immigration with racists and homophobes (like his grandfather) in the New York Times magazine:

When I was growing up in the 1980s, I watched my grandfather -- my dad’s stepdad -- struggle with his own prejudice. He was a blue-collar World War II veteran who loved his family above all things and was constantly afraid for them. He carried a gun and, like many men of his generation, saw threats in people he didn’t understand: African-Americans, independent women, gays. By the time he died, 10 years ago, he had softened. He stopped using racist and homophobic slurs; he even hugged my gay cousin. But there was one view he wasn’t going to change. He had no time for Hispanics, he told us, and he wasn’t backing down. After all, this wasn’t a matter of bigotry. It was plain economics. These immigrants were stealing jobs from “Americans.”

Political reporter Trip Gabriel's front-page report from the Iowa hustings in Thursday's New York Times was, even by the paper's standards, an amazingly dense thicket of ideologically loaded labeling, with the word "conservative" or "hard-line" or "right wing" cropping up in seemingly every sentence: "Conservatives Are Looking to Unite Behind an Alternative to Bush." In all, the word "conservative" appeared a whopping 18 times in headlines and non-quoted material in Gabriel's 1,200-word story -- a total of 28 labels in all.